September 10, 2009
OLYMPIA (AP) — Suspected drunken drivers who refuse a voluntary blood-alcohol test can still be forced to submit blood or breath samples under a judge’s warrant, the state Supreme Court ruled Thursday.
The 7-2 decision clarifies the state’s implied consent law, which says people suspected of drunken driving must give up their license for at least a year if they refuse to take a blood-alcohol test.
One part of the law says police still have the right to obtain a warrant for a suspect’s breath or blood samples if the suspect refuses a voluntary test. But it also says “no test shall be given” if a suspect refuses, unless that person is dead, unconscious, has seriously injured someone else or has been arrested for vehicular assault or vehicular homicide.
The court’s majority, led by Justice Susan Owens, said the Legislature clearly wanted to preserve search warrants as an avenue for collecting blood or breath samples. The “no test shall be given” portion of the law merely deals with additional exceptions to a voluntary test.
Ruling otherwise, the court said, would give drunken driving suspects the ability to block all blood-alcohol tests, “an absurd result for a law intended to assist in the investigation and prosecution of drunk drivers.”
The court’s two dissenters, led by Justice Richard Sanders, said the majority wasn’t interpreting the law correctly.
Rather than authorizing a separate route for blood-alcohol tests, Sanders wrote, the law should be read to allow search warrants for previously collected evidence, such as a hospital’s blood samples. Justice James Johnson joined Sanders in dissent.
For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish County DUI attorneys, King County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys, or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at http://www.washdui.com/
No comments:
Post a Comment